Sponsor Message:
Civil Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
St. Louis' Long Term Air Service Future  
User currently offlineLambertMan From United States of America, joined exactly 11 years ago today! , 2072 posts, RR: 36
Posted (6 years 2 months 3 weeks 3 days 8 hours ago) and read 6634 times:

As we speak the guillotine has came down on San Juan and we're waiting for the axe to drop on both Raleigh and St. Louis for the second time. An exciting time in aviation, no doubt.  Yeah sure

San Juan wasn't expected to be cut as badly as it was, which could take some of the blow for St. Louis. Whether that is a good thing or not is up to your interpretation. So I ask this: Is the best thing for the long-term health of the airport a mutual parting of ways with American, save for 40 or 50 flights or so? Or would you rather have AA nearly tear it down completely as I suggested and linger with 120-130 flights (aka just enough to keep other carriers away)?

I'm sitting at work and can't help but wonder. On one hand I'm happy to have American, regardless of what they think of the St. Louis market. We have service to some markets as a result of American alone. On the other hand, I'm frustrated that they wouldn't even consider London with a sweetheart deal from the city. The London deal is a microcosm of how they have treated St. Louis as a whole, which suggests they never will have any real interest in working with the city to further air service.

I'm of the preference that St. Louis take its lumps now and set a world record for unused gates to give another carrier an opportunity to come in and in time establish themselves as the non-Southwest carrier of choice. If oil prices were to stabilize, a carrier might identify St. Louis as a solid growth opportunity without AA here.

I just get the feeling that the time is up.

52 replies: All unread, showing first 25:
 
User currently offlineCubsrule From United States of America, joined May 2004, 22847 posts, RR: 20
Reply 1, posted (6 years 2 months 3 weeks 3 days 8 hours ago) and read 6618 times:



Quoting LambertMan (Thread starter):
So I ask this: Is the best thing for the long-term health of the airport a mutual parting of ways with American, save for 40 or 50 flights or so? Or would you rather have AA nearly tear it down completely as I suggested and linger with 120-130 flights (aka just enough to keep other carriers away)?

2 observations...

1) With oil prices what they are (and, unfortunately, increasingly uncertain), there's a part of me that says that current service is better than a hope of new service that may never materialize. When oil is $40/barrel, it's a lot easier to blow time and money on a route while it matures. That would seem to suggest that STL is better off with AA around regardless of how badly AA may treat the city or the airport.

2) I see no indication that AA is going to abandon the routes with large, healthy local demand... places like LAX or BOS. If that's the case, even if AA pares its schedule, the opportunities for a new entrant are limited. STL-ICT isn't exactly crying out for FL; STL-MSN isn't somewhere you're going to see B6. There are people in St. Louis who benefit from those routes, and the routes are likely irreplaceable.

That said, I think that aggressive WN expansion might be the most beneficial and realistic option for STL, and if WN smells blood, I don't think it's unreasonable to expect it. I think STL could support 200 WN flights/day and 40 or 50 AA flights, and that might be what St. Louisans ought to hope for.



I can't decide whether I miss the tulip or the bowling shoe more
User currently offlineSqurt29 From United States of America, joined Jul 2004, 25 posts, RR: 0
Reply 2, posted (6 years 2 months 3 weeks 2 days 16 hours ago) and read 6358 times:

Why would WN expansion be a problem?

User currently offlineAirportPlan From United States of America, joined Jan 2004, 469 posts, RR: 3
Reply 3, posted (6 years 2 months 3 weeks 2 days 15 hours ago) and read 6333 times:



Quoting Squrt29 (Reply 2):
Why would WN expansion be a problem?

WN has its own reativly new terminal at STL and isn't likely to use the vacant gates in the other terminals .


User currently offlineMrSTL From United States of America, joined Sep 2005, 468 posts, RR: 1
Reply 4, posted (6 years 2 months 3 weeks 2 days 15 hours ago) and read 6308 times:

Quoting AirportPlan (Reply 3):
WN has its own reativly new terminal at STL and isn't likely to use the vacant gates in the other terminals .

Correct, they have excess gates in concourse E (the East Terminal) they can use.



IMO regardless of whether AA pulls out or not it's a matter of time before WN overtakes them at STL. For example WN adds DEN - AA pulls flights, WN adds PHL- AA reduces flights, FL adds ATL-AA reduces frequency, WN increases TUL frequency AA reduces frequency, WN adds CMH frequency AA reduces frequency, FL and WN add MCO frequencies AA reduces flights. Granted this is not exclusive to STL.

[Edited 2008-05-29 06:56:32]

User currently offlinePC12Fan From United States of America, joined Jan 2007, 2431 posts, RR: 5
Reply 5, posted (6 years 2 months 3 weeks 2 days 14 hours ago) and read 6265 times:

In theory, SW could expand further down the concourse into the D gate areas, but that is very unlikely. Junky concourse and they would also have to skip over ATS gates.


Just when I think you've said the stupidest thing ever, you keep talkin'!
User currently offlineOzarkD9S From United States of America, joined Oct 2001, 5048 posts, RR: 21
Reply 6, posted (6 years 2 months 3 weeks 2 days 14 hours ago) and read 6256 times:

Since I have several friends that work foe AA at STL I would of course love to see AA build up here, but realistically:

The 50 seat ERJ's that make up the bulk of AA's STL schedule are a burden and bound to be phased out or relocated sooner or later.

STL for AA could be a great hub with the right-sized aircraft. TWA was on to something with the 717 purchase, the DC-9-30/717 was the ideal sized aircraft to maintain a healthy hub at STL. At one point in the 90's when TWA was retiring older aircraft, they were forced to substitute MD-80's in certain markets that simply couldn't support them, resulting in poor load factors. If and when AA gets new contracts in place, an order for E190/195's could only benefit the STL operation.

Barring that: Any airline that would want to expand in STL and do any kind of replacement flying should AA slash the schedules here again would need one very important asset: slots at LGA and DCA. And those are two routes I can't see AA dropping. Even in a worse case scenario, AA would likely keep those two markets in addition to ORD/DFW/MIA/LAX.

My personal preference for an AA replacement carrier would be AirTran. They're already here, the two flights I was on in and out of STL a few weeks ago had healthy loads and STL would be an ideal mid-sized hub for that carrier. Again, at least 3 or preferably 4 slot pairs at LGA and DCA would be crucial for them to make a real impact here.

The downside to that would be the relegating of STL to a virtual non-entity in the alliance game. We're almost at that point anyway, since AA won't even do London, as noted above. But facing reality, in the near future I only see maybe a dozen US cities having significant direct global connections, and STL won't be part of that in any case.

Guess we'll have to wait for the next AA cutback announcement before the future of STL can be speculated upon with any real fervor.



Next Up: STL-LGA-RIC-ATL-STL
User currently offlineMrSTL From United States of America, joined Sep 2005, 468 posts, RR: 1
Reply 7, posted (6 years 2 months 3 weeks 2 days 14 hours ago) and read 6222 times:

Since this is a STL thread here are some smaller news items regarding new service to STL:


Durbin is pushing Great Lakes to codeshare with AA:
http://www.thesouthern.com/articles/2008/05/08/local/24396138.txt

Great Lakes adds Jonesboro:
http://www.aero-news.net/index.cfm?C...426e2e-9911-48b3-a113-0f0d00fda801


Multi-Aero takes over Kirksville flying shifting flights to STL:
http://www.kirksvilledailyexpress.co...articles/2008/05/24/news/news1.txt


User currently offlineJfk777 From United States of America, joined Aug 2006, 8323 posts, RR: 7
Reply 8, posted (6 years 2 months 3 weeks 2 days 14 hours ago) and read 6205 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

St. Louis got spoiled by having TWA and greater flights then the local market could support. AA purchased TWA for a third hub before 9/11 and now with $120/barrel oil, airline economics are awful. When times get better and DFW is fuller, AA's St. Louis schedule will grow because St. Louis is where they have infrastructure and capacity they don't have in Chicago or DFW. TWA was a great airline but selling to Icahn was the lessor of the other devil, Frank Lorenzo of Eastern and Continental fame. The day they sold LHR to AA was the day TWA died.

User currently offlineCloudy From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 9, posted (6 years 2 months 3 weeks 2 days 14 hours ago) and read 6197 times:



Quoting OzarkD9S (Reply 6):
My personal preference for an AA replacement carrier would be AirTran. They're already here, the two flights I was on in and out of STL a few weeks ago had healthy loads and STL would be an ideal mid-sized hub for that carrier. Again, at least 3 or preferably 4 slot pairs at LGA and DCA would be crucial for them to make a real impact here.

This is unlikely. They are evidently far more interested in MKE or MDW as future large hubs. STL does not have anything near the metro area population and wealth of the Chicago/Milwaukee area.

We may see Saint Louis get more WN traffic in the future as connecting service to nearby service declines. A lot of people drive to STL to catch WN even now. Take away regional service to places like SPI and even more will drive.
But this would not make STL into a MDW. Even if all American's 50 seaters go, I doubt WN's operation could break the 100 flight a day level.

If Southwest were to buy a 90-110 seater such as the E Jets or (more likely) the MRJ or C-Series, it would be a major boost to stations such as STL. It may more than double STL's growth potential for them. That, and the evidence that B and A may abandon this market, make such a purchase seem likely to me.


User currently offlineTVNWZ From United States of America, joined Feb 2006, 2368 posts, RR: 2
Reply 10, posted (6 years 2 months 3 weeks 2 days 14 hours ago) and read 6186 times:



Quoting LambertMan (Thread starter):
The London deal is a microcosm of how they have treated St. Louis as a whole, which suggests they never will have any real interest in working with the city to further air service.

I could see a STL-GIG route added if the AB deal materializes.


User currently offlineMrSTL From United States of America, joined Sep 2005, 468 posts, RR: 1
Reply 11, posted (6 years 2 months 3 weeks 2 days 14 hours ago) and read 6176 times:



Quoting Jfk777 (Reply 8):
The day they sold LHR to AA was the day TWA died.

I agree, I remember reading the headline on the front page of the PD and knew it would soon be over. Made me sick at the time. They actually lasted a lot longer than I thought they would after that.


User currently offlineMoMan From United States of America, joined Aug 2004, 1054 posts, RR: 4
Reply 12, posted (6 years 2 months 3 weeks 2 days 9 hours ago) and read 5978 times:

It would be a very sad day for STL if AA cut the hub. Every time I go there I notice how it seems more and more like the TWA days - on both Friday and Monday the 'C' gates were crammed with people. The shops are nice and the airport isn't in such bad shape as it used it be.

One problem with the airport management is that they have actively recruited other airlines in to directly compete with AA, not necessarily fill empty holes. AirTran's flights compete with current or previous mainline AA routes. JetBlue is often rumored to come to STL which is another direct competitor. While the airport management goal is to provide cheap service, if they run off AA it's not like AirTran is going to suddenly start flying STL-SFO. There is no major network carrier that has the ability or desire to step into STL. The LCC carriers are suffering just as much, and WN has stated numerous times how they are happy with their STL operation. I personally do not see WN growing at all in STL, and only marginally if AA leaves.

It's time for the airport authority and the city of St. Louis to work with American Airlines instead of constantly battling them. Unfortunately, AA does have the city and state of MO in a corner, but paying a little more for air service is a lot better than having none at all.



AA Platinum Member - American Airlines Forever
User currently offlineVictrola From United States of America, joined Apr 2008, 505 posts, RR: 1
Reply 13, posted (6 years 2 months 3 weeks 2 days 9 hours ago) and read 5948 times:



Quoting MrSTL (Reply 11):
I could see a STL-GIG route added if the AB deal materializes

So Air Berlin is looking to start up a St. Louis to Rio de Janeiro route????????????


User currently offlineTVNWZ From United States of America, joined Feb 2006, 2368 posts, RR: 2
Reply 14, posted (6 years 2 months 3 weeks 2 days 8 hours ago) and read 5949 times:



Quoting MoMan (Reply 12):
One problem with the airport management is that they have actively recruited other airlines in to directly compete with AA, not necessarily fill empty holes.

I think airport management would be fools to not hedge their bets with AA. I think AA has made it clear they are not going to grow much, if at all, in St. Louis. The airlines, themselves, determine where they will fly and when. Not the airport.


User currently offlineJonBNASTL From United States of America, joined Jan 2008, 11 posts, RR: 0
Reply 15, posted (6 years 2 months 3 weeks 2 days 8 hours ago) and read 5811 times:



Quoting Victrola (Reply 13):


Quoting MrSTL (Reply 11):
I could see a STL-GIG route added if the AB deal materializes

So Air Berlin is looking to start up a St. Louis to Rio de Janeiro route????????????

I guess he's referring to the speculation that InBev (brewer headquartered in Belgium, but having a large presence in Brazil) is going to propose a takeover bid for Anheuser-Busch (headquartered in STL).

As big as Anheuser-Busch is in STL, I don't personally see a buyout leading to the resurrection of intercontinental service there. Don't get me wrong, I'm sure AA would love to handle whatever traffic is created... through ORD, DFW, and/or MIA.


User currently offlineTVNWZ From United States of America, joined Feb 2006, 2368 posts, RR: 2
Reply 16, posted (6 years 2 months 3 weeks 2 days 7 hours ago) and read 5754 times:



Quoting Victrola (Reply 13):
Quoting MrSTL (Reply 11):
I could see a STL-GIG route added if the AB deal materializes

So Air Berlin is looking to start up a St. Louis to Rio de Janeiro route????????????

Air Berlin? No. But Anheuser Busch (AB to those in STL) may be bought by InBev. I could see a big business route developing (short term) here. Or at least more flights to MIA. Maybe even BRU.


User currently offlineTVNWZ From United States of America, joined Feb 2006, 2368 posts, RR: 2
Reply 17, posted (6 years 2 months 3 weeks 2 days 7 hours ago) and read 5735 times:



Quoting JonBNASTL (Reply 15):
I guess he's referring to the speculation that InBev (brewer headquartered in Belgium

Yes. Technically headquartered in Belgium, but basically run out of Brazil. The Brazilians are in charge.


User currently offline777STL From United States of America, joined Dec 2004, 3605 posts, RR: 3
Reply 18, posted (6 years 2 months 3 weeks 2 days 5 hours ago) and read 5541 times:



Quoting TVNWZ (Reply 16):
Air Berlin? No. But Anheuser Busch (AB to those in STL) may be bought by InBev. I could see a big business route developing (short term) here. Or at least more flights to MIA. Maybe even BRU.

Doubtful. AA won't be bringing international service to STL on an aircraft type that doesn't currently see STL because of this *potential* merger. AA won't be filling a 763 solely with those involved with this merger. Trust me on this.

I'm gonna be optimistic, I don't think STL is going to get chopped as badly as we think it will. There's not much deadweight left to dispose of, at least not mainline.



PHX based
User currently offlineMAH4546 From Sweden, joined Jan 2001, 32688 posts, RR: 72
Reply 19, posted (6 years 2 months 3 weeks 2 days 5 hours ago) and read 5536 times:



Quoting TVNWZ (Reply 16):

Air Berlin? No. But Anheuser Busch (AB to those in STL) may be bought by InBev. I could see a big business route developing (short term) here. Or at least more flights to MIA. Maybe even BRU.

There will be no STL-GIG or STL-BRU service ever, and that can be said with 99.5% certainty.



a.
User currently offlineCubsrule From United States of America, joined May 2004, 22847 posts, RR: 20
Reply 20, posted (6 years 2 months 3 weeks 2 days 5 hours ago) and read 5512 times:



Quoting Cloudy (Reply 9):
STL does not have anything near the metro area population and wealth of the Chicago/Milwaukee area.

Chicago is larger than St. Louis, but Milwaukee isn't (even if you add the northernmost counties in Illinois). I don't quite understand what FL is doing here. They seem to do all right, but they've done nothing with their second gate.

Quoting Cloudy (Reply 9):
Even if all American's 50 seaters go, I doubt WN's operation could break the 100 flight a day level.

Well, WN flies STL-SDF 2x daily... they could do that to BNA and IND if AA cut them. STL-MSY could probably support 3 daily flights. STL-JAX is good for a flight or two, as is STL-AUS. ORF has a nice coporate base. There's plenty of growth potential in current AX cities (which WN by and large stays away from). Add in a little west coast expansion (and WN could probably make SAN and OAK work even with AA on the routes) and you're easily over 100 flights.

Quoting Cloudy (Reply 9):

If Southwest were to buy a 90-110 seater such as the E Jets or (more likely) the MRJ or C-Series, it would be a major boost to stations such as STL.

What markets could they do with a 100 seater that cannot support 137 seats?



I can't decide whether I miss the tulip or the bowling shoe more
User currently offlineBDL2STL2PVG From China, joined Jun 2006, 150 posts, RR: 0
Reply 21, posted (6 years 2 months 3 weeks 2 days 4 hours ago) and read 5419 times:



Quoting LambertMan (Thread starter):
I'm of the preference that St. Louis take its lumps now and set a world record for unused gates to give another carrier an opportunity to come in and in time establish themselves as the non-Southwest carrier of choice

I think that PIT is a good example of what could happen at STL. The progressive reductions by US could similarly happen. But at the end, will PIT get back up to levels approaching pre 9/11 or even 2003? When BNA and RDU were taken down, the economy was different and bit by bit they climbed back to services levels approximating their hub levels. Today, that type of opportunity isn't likely. The oil prices, the contraction of other carriers, the DL-NW merger, all these factors make it look bleak for STL to re-grow.

I agree, they need to try to keep AA significant as much as possible, because there isn't much likelihood that another will step in when AA drops down. When do you play in a crooked card game?....when its the only game in town.


User currently offlinePSU.DTW.SCE From United States of America, joined Jan 2002, 7549 posts, RR: 28
Reply 22, posted (6 years 2 months 3 weeks 2 days 2 hours ago) and read 5224 times:



Quoting Cubsrule (Reply 1):
1) With oil prices what they are (and, unfortunately, increasingly uncertain), there's a part of me that says that current service is better than a hope of new service that may never materialize.

Agreed.

Quoting MAH4546 (Reply 19):
There will be no STL-GIG or STL-BRU service ever, and that can be said with 99.5% certainty.

I'm going to up you and say 99.9999997% chance of that NEVER happening.

Quoting 777STL (Reply 18):
I'm gonna be optimistic, I don't think STL is going to get chopped as badly as we think it will. There's not much deadweight left to dispose of, at least not mainline.

I agree with you. The few remaining 757's other than MIA/DFW/ORD are probably gone. There will likely be some frequency reductions on the AX side. Other than that I doubt there will be much in the way of any destinations cut - mainline or Connection. As said, they already have pruned down STL and what is left isn't all that bad.

Quoting BDL2STL2PVG (Reply 21):
I agree, they need to try to keep AA significant as much as possible, because there isn't much likelihood that another will step in when AA drops down. When do you play in a crooked card game?....when its the only game in town.

There really isn't going to be another game in town, unless the industry, economy, and oil all turn around. Airlines like FL, B6, & F9 aren't going to offer much more than token service to the usual cherry-picked routes (and leisure routes are the first to get hit hard in a sour economy). WN isn't going to do much more than they are to their existing stations. They aren't looking to open any new stations and they aren't going to significantly ramp up STL & DEN at the same time. WN could increase frequencies in markets where it makes sense but that is about it.


User currently offlineLambertMan From United States of America, joined exactly 11 years ago today! , 2072 posts, RR: 36
Reply 23, posted (6 years 2 months 3 weeks 2 days 1 hour ago) and read 5079 times:



Quoting BDL2STL2PVG (Reply 21):
I agree, they need to try to keep AA significant as much as possible, because there isn't much likelihood that another will step in when AA drops down. When do you play in a crooked card game?....when its the only game in town.

Haha. Nice metaphor.

I suppose I am jumping to conclusions with my frustration over AA's St. Louis dealings because it could be a moot point anyway. AA didn't owe it to the city of St. Louis to retain 208 daily flights back in 2003. In that case, they were willing to work with the city to retain all service possible.

With everything taken into consideration, I still think AA will retain a decent chunk of their ops in St. Louis and I welcome it. Airlines will fly where the dollars are and in consideration of AA's other assets, their approach is understandable.

But really.....would it be so bad to throw us a bone and at least consider London?  Wink


User currently offlineCubsrule From United States of America, joined May 2004, 22847 posts, RR: 20
Reply 24, posted (6 years 2 months 3 weeks 2 days 1 hour ago) and read 5062 times:



Quoting LambertMan (Reply 23):
But really.....would it be so bad to throw us a bone and at least consider London?

While I (still) wouldn't hold my breath, I think we will stand a much better chance of seeing London if/when AA and BA get ATI because that alleviates the need for essentially redundant flights to ORD (particularly if BA deploys the whalejet to ORD at some point). We shall see...



I can't decide whether I miss the tulip or the bowling shoe more
25 BDL2STL2PVG : I do agree, London could be more likely with BA/AA ATI. In fact, one could argue that if that happened, there may be a better chance getting BA metal
26 Cubsrule : Is the new facility (in the East Terminal) any better?
27 MoMan : Yeah, that will be the day (that will never happen). The STLAA (Aviation authority - not to be confused with American Airlines) has a responsibility
28 Cubsrule : I can't imagine a scenario in which AA exits STL-LAX, LGA, or DCA. Some other cities, like SFO, SEA, and BOS are probably just about as safe.
29 MoMan : Unfortunately I can. This scenario will happen if the STLAA continues to lure low fare carriers to take the easy routes and AA determines that the ai
30 Cubsrule : BNA supports 3 daily (mainline) flights to LGA with next to no feed. St. Louis is twice the size of Nashville and has less competition to New York th
31 MoMan : The STL hub is a good size operation for AA. AA has consitently retreated in STL and other markets with incursion of LCC carriers. Regardless of the
32 Cubsrule : So why do they fly BNA-LGA or BNA-DCA?
33 MoMan : Your guess is as good as mine but I think you are failing to see my point. It's possible that AA will keep STL-LGA even if they cut all other routes,
34 Cubsrule : If they can make money on the route, why would they get rid of it? You don't need to call an airport a hub or have any opportunities for connections
35 LambertMan : Flights to LGA will remain almost no matter what, because not only is it a strong market, there is essentially no LCC penetration in the market. Ther
36 Cubsrule : RSW is somewhat higher-yield than other Florida destinations, though, and with U5 apparently leaving scheduled service, AA won't have any competition
37 Humberside : They are meant to be keeping RSW as their only domestic destination. MLB, FLL, SRQ and PIE are being axed
38 MrSTL : MEM drops July 2nd-- this has been in the schedule for a couple weeks. CID and MSN were pretty high fare routes the last time I looked, I would not e
39 Cubsrule : SPI may be political or it may actually work... there's no need to compete with UA to ORD when STL can get you to the most important destinations. Th
40 777STL : I'd be highly surprised to see RSW going anywhere. It's always been a strong route even back in the TW days when it was 4x daily in season, with one
41 Cloudy : On paper SPI looks good, which is why a lot of airlines have tried service here. But it never seems to work out to any point other than STL and ORD.
42 Cubsrule : Something has changed at RSW... I'm not sure what. If you look to ORD, for instance, UA used to have multiple daily frequencies on aircraft as large
43 777STL : I wouldn't doubt it. Hell, DL used to fly 11x 763s ex-ATL there back four or five years ago before they reduced their 763 domestic flying. Now it's d
44 Cubsrule : I actually live in Missouri but I drive to Chicago fairly frequently and don't like to deal with downtown traffic if it's bad. That sounds about righ
45 MSYtristar : I'd be surprised if they cancel all service from STL to MSY...they are currently running 5 ERJ's a day with no competition in the market. If anything,
46 MrSTL : Latest STL AA/AX frequency cut: STL-IAD reduced 4x daily ER4 to 2x daily eff 7/02
47 Cubsrule : Any corresponding increase at MIA? I suspect there is one...
48 777STL : I don't blame you. I also drive to Chicago fairly frequently to as my gf is from there. Most boring drive ever, I'd rather fly.
49 Chase : I wouldn't really see the point of adding STL-IND. As for O&D, it's faster to drive, depending on where you're going to/from within the cities. I use
50 JonBNASTL : Except for DAL, of course... if they were to offer IND-STL-DAL, it would be a slightly shorter distance than the IND-MCI-DAL service they currently o
51 Cubsrule : Why fly STL-SDF, then?
52 Chase : Beats me...I guess the people who do this for a living rather than for pretend know something I don't
Top Of Page
Forum Index

This topic is archived and can not be replied to any more.

Printer friendly format

Similar topics:More similar topics...
New Service SUS-MKC By St. Louis Air posted Fri Jun 10 2005 22:45:08 by MCIFlyer
St. Louis Midamerica Airport's Future? posted Fri Oct 26 2007 07:28:04 by ORDagent
A380, Legit Long Term Future Or Just A Temp Fad? posted Fri Feb 24 2006 06:58:53 by AviationAddict
Question About Air Canada's Long Haul Food Service posted Fri Aug 20 2004 03:57:55 by CO737800
MidAmerica/St. Louis Gets Commerical Service Again posted Wed Aug 20 2003 17:32:40 by MAH4546
Air Transport Future...A Boom posted Thu May 29 2008 03:39:31 by Pihero
MKG Hopes To Revive Chicago Air Service posted Wed May 21 2008 15:05:15 by KarlB737
Airport Air Service Development Books posted Fri May 16 2008 17:18:32 by MOBflyer
Air Service Development At D/FW posted Wed May 14 2008 20:47:59 by IrishAyes
Airline Failure: Good For Industry In Long-term? posted Sun Apr 27 2008 12:26:29 by Tuiflyer